Archive for: November 2015

President Kiir calls every one, everywhere to support peace.
Dr. Riek calls for people to write about peace and reconciliation.

Ladies and gentlemen and my fellow South Sudanese, there is no better time to congratulate president Salva Kiir and his associates; and Dr. Riek Machar and his associates in working tirelessly to bring about the Compromised Peace Agreement (CPA).

I was one among many who decried the war that has derailed our lovely progress and I remain critical of the fact that there was no hope of reaching such a surprise ending of signing security arrangement.

As being one of those who was quick to decry the violence because it was clear that violence could only destroy and bring development to a stand still, I am hereby presenting my gratitude among the groups who would appreciate a work well done.

I would like to register my sincere appreciation for all the leaders from both factions of the Sudan People Liberation Movement. I am confident there are many within and outside the country who are happy for your great move to accept peace deal through negotiation and this spirit deserves appreciation as long as honesty is well injected in the implementation.

To General Public:
Let us try to insert some peaceful words in our arguments. I know it is too early, but can be done. It is time to move with the current.

Talking collectively, no one was not affected in one way or another by the recent war that was supposed to be resolved within the administrative organs of the movement, but mistakes do happen resulting into a bitter exchange of blows-leaving a mark that will take sometime to disappear.

As a result of mishandling the dispute and added to by political miscalculations, civil war ensued as a matter of fact, innocent people died for reasons not known to many. At the end, the conflict ended in a room. I hope there is a lesson or lessons to learn.

Peace Implementation is paramount.
What matters the most at the moment is to concentrate on peace. Let us focus on supporting the peace. It is time to focus on how peace can be implemented.

Thereafter, we can continue to redirect the questions, for instance, how can we collectively contribute in one way or another toward the building of sustainable peace?

President Kiir, and Dr. Riek and their respective associates are now focussing on peace implementation.

Thus; I pledge with my colleagues who are concerned with the welfare of the nation and would like to argue and discuss the matter as therapeutic approach, to follow the route the leaders are taking now which is the route leading to peace in the country.

We do hope that one within the leadership is playing rat vs cat game. Good faith will give hope to the entire country. That is what we want.

Reasons and Debates-the new battle field.
Let reasoning and debates replace civil war in the country. Everything that men would like to achieve through violence can be achieved through understanding.

So long as government continues to listen to the voices of the people, and people show initiative of petitioning the government in a manner that is acceptable and respectable, I do not see any reasons for ongoing rebellion that keeps our nation behind the global standard and progress.

Leaders, intellectuals and everyone who is concerned and able to do something.
What we need for now is the fulfillment of the SPLM manifesto.

Let us create the change that is desirable, these are freedom of media, freedom of political expression/communication, national reconciliation and the reconstruction of the nation and then trust that was damaged among individuals.

The leaders have to lead at all time.
Allow me to include with the following passage from two concerned ladies and supporters of the national interest and people of high interest in peace success in South Sudan: It is a simple answer to what is peace?

Peace means riding peacefully (especially as a woman…) from Yei to Juba. It means our kids can get education & play at schools without parents fearing for safety of their kids…it means we can access clean water & medicines. It means we are able to sleep at night knowing we are safe. It means NO TRIBAL HATE OR BARRIERS. It means we can work based on our merit and determination…it means to love my Nation and do my part as a citizen without fear or intimidation….it means peace of mind.

So, what is peace for you? Definitely it is not taking guns to express dissatisfaction, it is not intimidation from the government military or police either. It is not suppression of expression or suppression of media outlets.

It is about safety for a person who travels from Aweil to Zande land without fear of being attacked by a tribal gangs. It is about a citizen travelling from one of the Upper Nile villages to anywhere in South Sudan knowing that his or her security is secured.

Politically paramount approach to show a government is listening and indication of good governance.

The implementation of the 28 States needs to be seriously considered, the process matters to set good example to the future generation.

The government can create more States than 28 but the process has to be deliberated in the parliament to show good image of the government and lay foundation for a better future of deliberation.

I am not driven by anything else apart from the same spirit that keeps our liberators fighting for many years without money but for good cause. This is my perspective. For peace and my country.

Conclusively, congratulations to our leaders for choosing the challenges of building peace peacefully. You have done extremely good thing and reached one of the best decisions we live to see again and again.

You are the bench setters, if you do not leave a good system who will do it? Above all do not forget your old aged need for better security and stable peace. It is time to prepare for that moment, our dear honourable leaders.

I have just finished reading the 315 page AU final report on the crisis in South Sudan. This is a comprehensive report and I must admit that the Commission has done a splendid and commendable work in terms of the investigation and talking to witnesses on both sides of divide.

The Commission traced the history of conflicts in Sudan and during the SPLM struggle. Of particular interest is the repeated reference to 1991 SPLM split. The Commission delved into all the factors that could have precipitated the conflict in South Sudan. It concluded that gross human right abuses, crimes against humanity and violations of humanitarian law took place in South Sudan.

However, the eminent Commission stopped short of concluding that genocide was committed in the country when it detailed many scenarios that could constitute genocide. It also made valuable recommendations that may form the basis for restoration of peace and unity in South Sudan. However, the issue of genocide is what informs my dilemma here.

Let me be forthright here to declare that I am not here to dispute the conclusions of Commission neither am I here to challenge any iota about the competence of the Commission or its diligence to carry out its work. I repeat here that indeed the Commission did a fabulous jog despite constraints in terms of continuous insecurity in the country and limited resources as it contended in the report.

I am not also here to justify that genocide has taken place in South Sudan but I am, from the findings of the commission, trying to match its the findings with factors that UN considers to constitute genocide and leave it to my readers to determine whether genocide was committed or not during this conflict.

Genocide is defined in Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948) as “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part1; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

The key word here is “intent to destroy”. Before I can try to point out whether there was any intend to destroy a committee during this conflict, it is prudent that I discuss the UN Analysis Framework that it uses to determine if there is likely risk for ge3neocide to occur or if genocide has actually taken place. This is quite important for my readers to objectively compare the findings in the report with the eight categories of factors in the UN analytical framework so as to make their own conclusions.

The Office of the UN Special Adviser on the prevention of Genocide (OSAPG) uses an Analysis Framework that comprises eight categories of factors that determine whether there may be a risk of genocide in a given situation or genocide has taken place. These eight factors include:
1. Inter-group relations, including record of discrimination and/or other human rights violations committed against a group
2. Circumstances that affect the capacity to prevent genocide
3. Presence of illegal arms and armed elements
4. Motivation of leading actors in the State/region; acts which serve to encourage divisions between national, racial, ethnic, and religious groups
5. Circumstances that facilitate perpetration of genocide (dynamic factors)
6. Genocidal acts
7. Evidence of intent “to destroy in whole or in part …”

According to the UN, these eight categories of factors are not ranked, and the absence of information relating to one or more categories does not necessarily indicate the absence of a risk of genocide. However, the most significant thing is the cumulative effect of the factors. UN concludes that if these factors become none existent in any country, then the risk of genocide is assumed to decrease.

In order to understand the situation in South Sudan, it is worth looking at what UN considers as issues to be analyzed under each of these factors that can determine risk of genocide. By analyzing each one we may be able to determine whether AU Commission might have inadvertently missed to conclude that genocide was committed in South Sudan. Therefore, in this article, I will consider each analyzable issue under each of the eight factors and try to match them with crucial findings in the report.

1. Inter-group relations, including record of discrimination and/or other human rights violations committed against a group
According to the UN the issues to be considered here are:
• Relations between and among groups in terms of tensions, power and economic relations, including perceptions about the targeted group;
• Existing and past conflicts over land, power, security and expressions of group identity, such as language, religion and culture;
• Past and present patterns of discrimination against members of any group which could include:
I. Serious discriminatory practices, for instance, the compulsory identification of members of a particular group, imposition of taxes/fines, permission required for social activities such as marriage, compulsory birth-control, the systematic exclusion of groups from positions of power, employment in State institutions and/or key professions2;
II. Significant disparities in socio-economic indicators showing a pattern of deliberate exclusion from economic resources and social and political life.
• Overt justification for such discriminatory practices;
• History of genocide or related serious and massive human rights violations against a particular group; denial by the perpetrators;
• References to past human rights violations committed against a possible perpetrator group as a justification for genocidal acts against the targeted group in the future.

Considering the situation in South Sudan, three things stand out clearly before the conflict erupted in South Sudan, First there was tense relations between Kiir and Riak groups over power. The report clearly indicated that the conflict originated over split in the movement. This couple with Kiir’s mobilization speeches in Bahr el Ghazal that the power that the community fought for is been threatened and this community should not allow it to be taken away under any cost.

The mobilization of the army in Bahr el Ghazal testifies to this factor that tension over power was high. The community strongly believes in power in South Sudan as birth right and felt that the community of Riak was threatening this right to rule and exploit the country.

The second thing that came out of the report was the clear reference to the past conflict between the Dinkas and Nuers particularly in reference to the 1991 split in the movement. It is a known fact that many people particularly Dinkas lost their lives during that conflict and up to date nobody was held responsible despite the fact that Riak is reported to have taken responsibility for that unfortunate incident and publically apologized to the Dinka community.

Whether the Dinka leadership appreciated that apology or not, is unclear but it appears some Dinkas were looking for opportunity to avenge.

The third issue to consider here is reference to the past rights violations against a possible perpetrator group as justification for genocidal act. The AU report is full of statements uttered by senior SPLA commanders and government officials in reference to the 1991 so-called Bor genocide.

The president is quoted clearly in the report as pronouncing in the NLC meeting that 1991 incident would not repeat itself again. This means that the president himself was already contemplating a chance of revenge and indeed what happened in Juba must have been done to avenge the Bor incident. This is why despite the fact that though the group opposing the government had only 4 Nuer community, the mass killings in Juba targeted only the Nuer community.

2. Circumstances that affect the capacity to prevent genocide. The issues to be analyzed here include:
• Existing structures that can protect genocide such as effective legislative protection; independent judiciary and effective national human rights institutions,
• Whether these structures effective
• Whether vulnerable groups have genuine access to the protection afforded by the structures;
• Patterns of impunity and lack of accountability for past crimes committed against
• the targeted groups;
• Other options for obtaining protection against genocide, e.g. presence of
• peacekeepers in a position to defend the group, or seeking asylum in other

Although the report noted that South Sudan has a constitution with clear chapter on human rights, parliament, judiciary and human right commission, these institutions are rendered toothless and the president usurped all the powers to use decrees to rule the country.

In fact the executive created a situation where these institutions became the mouthpieces of the government. Since the war broke out in South Sudan, the parliament and judiciary went into a state of coma while the commission on human rights could only write weak reports that tend to exonerate the establishment.

On the other hand the ethnic group that faced extermination in Juba had no chance to seek redress instead, up to date, they have been hunted like rats in their own country. Even when they get shelter from the UN compounds, they have never been free from killings. The report demonstrated vividly the attack on the UN compound in Bor where several people died, the continuous killing and raping of men and women who try to venture out of the camps to get firewood or any other items of necessity.

In South Sudan, the government has killed and detained people and looted government coffers without any accountability. This is the level of impunity the report has correctly articulated.

3. Presence of illegal arms and armed elements. The critical issues to be looked at here include:
• Whether there exists a capacity to perpetrate genocide – especially, but not exclusively, by killing;
• How armed groups are formed, who arms them and what links they have to state authorities, if any;
• In cases of armed rebellions or uprising, whether a state has justified targeting groups from which armed actors have drawn their membership.

The AU Commission is very clear on the fact that there existed in South Sudan two groups of armies who had the capacity to perpetrate genocide. There was the regular army particularly the presidential guards and the Mathiang Nyoor recruited from Bahr el Ghazal and trained in Luri under the watchful eye of the president and supported by him. This army was rejected by the SPLM general command because it was not a part of the national army. It is reported that this army was the one used to systematically kill innocent civilians.

The report also pointed out that tanks were used to not only destroy houses including Riak’s house but also to directly fire on civil populations not only in Juba but in many areas particularly during the scotch earth policy that ended in the mass murder and destruction in Leer in Unity state.

The report is also very vivid on the formation, training and deployment of the Mathiang Nyoor soldiers. It is clear from the report that this force was recruited from one community, trained in Juba and initially deployed in Juba to clean roads for purposes of surveillance on the location of the targeted community.

During the initial days of conflict, the perpetrators of the conflict divided the town into three command areas that systematically carried out their genocidal act on civilians with absolute precision. They collected civilians and butchered them mercilessly in various areas including police stations. In order for the government to justify its genocidal activities, it concocted its “dodo” coup theory; a theory which the Commission found out to be grossly false.

This theory was aimed at hoodwinking the international community to believe that the killings in Juba occurred during cross-fire between combatants. Thus the dead were not intended targets. If so why was it that only one community became the victim of crossfire when Juba is populated with all tribes of South Sudan? In fact the report revealed that soldiers when from house to house seeking out particular groups for extermination.

4. Motivation of leading actors in the State/region; acts which serve to encourage divisions between national, racial, ethnic, and religious groups. The issues that need to be analyzed are whether there were:
• Underlying political, economic, military or other motivation to target a group and to separate it from the rest of the population;
• The use of exclusionary ideology and the construction of identities in terms of “us” and “them” to accentuate differences;
• Depiction of a targeted group as dangerous, disloyal, a security or economic threat or as unworthy or inferior so as to justify action against the group;
• Propaganda campaigns and fabrications about the targeted group used to justify acts against a targeted group by use of dominant, controlled media or “mirror politics”;
• Any relevant role, whether active or passive, of actors outside the country (e.g., other Governments, armed groups based in neighboring countries, refugee groups or diasporas) and respective political or economic motivations.

Although the Commission is not explicit on these issues, there was already huge propaganda within SPLM that depicted the opposition as dangerous, disloyal and a security threat without any evidence. The recruitment of Mathiang Nyoor and their deployment in Juba to defend the president means there was already a perverted feeling within the establishment that there was a dangerous group that intended to usurp power from the so-called elected government. The report is clear on the activities and pronouncements made before and during the NLC meeting in which the President threatened the opposition and prevented it from actively participating in the deliberations of the meeting.

5. Circumstances that facilitate perpetration of genocide (dynamic factors). The issue here is whether there were any development of events, whether gradual or sudden, that suggest a trajectory towards the perpetration of genocidal violence, or the existence of a longer term plan or policy to commit genocide such as:
• Sudden or gradual strengthening of the military or security apparatus; creation of or increased support to militia groups (e.g., sudden increases in arms flow) in the absence of discernible legitimate threats;
• Attempts to reduce or eradicate diversity within the security apparatus;
• Preparation of local population to use them to perpetrate acts;
• Introduction of legislation derogating the rights of a targeted group;
• Imposition of emergency or extraordinary security laws and facilities that erode civil rights and liberties;
• Sudden increase in inflammatory rhetoric or hate propaganda, especially by leaders, that sets a tone of impunity, even if it does not amount to incitement to genocidal violence in itself;
• Permissive environment created by ongoing armed conflict that could facilitate access to weapons and commission of genocide.

The AU Commission is replete with the fact that these issues existed in South Sudan before the massacre took place in Juba and during the subsequent period of the war. The military buildup continues up to date with recruitment in Bahr el Ghazal despite the signing of the ceasefire.

The report pointed out that the government was getting wary of the number of Nuer soldiers in the army because 60% or more of the SPLA forces were from Nuer community and there was certainly a need to offset this balance. This can only be done through more recruitment from other communities or by initiating a war of attrition so as to reduce this numbers and this is what might have transpired. During the conflict, the government recruited and armed militia groups in Upper Nile and Bentui to persecute the war.

The report also mentioned the security laws the government introduced in parliament aimed at carrying out unprecedented arrest of opponents and journalists without any warrant of arrest. The National South Sudan TV became an instrument of hate, propaganda and promoting hatred on the pretext of military moral orientation. This was aimed at encouraging people to rise against one ethnic group.

6. Genocidal acts. The issues here include:
• Acts that could be obvious “elements” of the crime of genocide as defined in Article 6 of the Rome Statute, such as killings, abduction and disappearances, torture, rape and sexual violence; ‘ethnic cleansing’ or pogroms;
• Less obvious methods of destruction, such as the deliberate deprivation of resources needed for the group’s physical survival and which are available to the rest of the population, such as clean water, food and medical services;
• Creation of circumstances that could lead to a slow death, such as lack of proper housing, clothing and hygiene or excessive work or physical exertion;
• Programs intended to prevent procreation, including involuntary sterilization, forced abortion, prohibition of marriage and long-term separation of men and women;
• Forcible transfer of children, imposed by direct force or through fear of violence, duress, detention, psychological oppression or other methods of coercion;
• Death threats or ill treatment that causes disfigurement or injury; forced or coerced use of drugs or other treatment that damages health.

For those who have read the AU report, they must have seen the graphic description of the killings, abductions, torture and mutilation of bodies in Juba. The report has detailed the scale of raping and the intention to use sexual violence as a tool of war. The ethnic cleansing that is happening in Upper Nile and Bentui with an intention of creating single ethnic group federal states.

This goal has been consummated by the recent unilateral decree by the president creating 28 states in South Sudan. The aim is to have states where Nuer and Shilluk cannot co-exist with Dinka and to deprive the Nuer and Shilluk the oil resources in Upper Nile and Bentui. The destruction of houses, looting of cows and destruction of growing fields in Bentui is a means to create conducive atmosphere whereby the citizenry will slowly die of hunger and other famine related disease. The issue of cannibalism has been depicted in the report. This is worse than coerced use of drugs or other treatment known to mankind that damage health.

7. Evidence of intent “to destroy in whole or in part …”. In order to establish any intent to commit genocide, there is need to analyze the following:
• Statements amounting to hate speech by those involved in a genocidal campaign;
• In a large-scale armed conflict, widespread and systematic nature of acts; intensity and scale of acts and invariability of killing methods used against the same protected group; types of weapons employed (in particular weapons prohibited under international law) and the extent of bodily injury caused;
• In a non-conflict situation, widespread and/or systematic discriminatory and targeted practices culminating in gross violations of human rights of protected groups, such as extrajudicial killings, torture and displacement;
• The specific means used to achieve “ethnic cleansing” which may underscore that the perpetration of the acts is designed to reach the foundations of the group or what is considered as such by the perpetrator group;
• The nature of the atrocities, e.g., dismemberment of those already killed that reveal a level of dehumanization of the group or euphoria at having total control over another human being, or the systematic rape of women which may be intended to transmit a new ethnic identity to the child or to cause humiliation and terror in order to fragment the group; The destruction of or attacks on cultural and religious property and symbols of the targeted group that may be designed to annihilate the historic presence of the group or groups;
• Targeted elimination of community leaders and/or men and/or women of a particular age group (the ‘future generation’ or a military-age group);
• Other practices designed to complete the exclusion of targeted group from social/political life.

Since the outbreak of the conflict in South Sudan in December 2013, the South Sudan TV has been turned and used as an organ to propagate hate and propaganda aimed at creating hatred against targeted community. The widespread killing, the burning and mutilation of bodies, killing of victims by asphyxiation and forcing of victims to drink human blood and eating human flash shows nothing other than clear intent to dehumanize the victims. This is also intended to depict the idea of having total control over other human beings. The Commission heard of use of cluster bombs on civilians by the government or government surrogates.

The widespread destruction of homes in Unity state, the hunting of civilians hiding in marches, killing of children and widespread destruction of property and means of living is reported by the Commission. This act underscores the perpetrator’s goal to reach the foundation of their group.

8. Triggering factors. These are events or circumstances that might aggravate conditions or spark deterioration in the situation, pointing to the likely onset of a genocidal episode. These ‘triggers’ might include:
• Upcoming elections (and associated activities such as voter registration or campaigning; revision of delimitation of electoral boundaries; a call for early elections or the postponement or cancellation of elections; disbanding of election commissions; imposition of new quotas/standards for political party or candidate eligibility);
• Change of Government outside of an electoral or constitutionally sanctioned process; Instances where the military is deployed internally to act against civilians;
• Commencement of armed hostilities;
• Natural disasters that may stress state capacity and strengthen active opposition groups;
• Increases in opposition capacity, which may be perceived as a threat and prompt preemptive action, or rapidly declining opposition capacity which may invite rapid action to eliminate problem groups.9

In the case of this conflict the report is very clear that the SPLM elections, the increasing opposition capacity and strengthening of the opposition capacity was perceived as a threat to the power that be. This might have prompted a pre-emptive action from the side of the government

Having analyzed the factors that could lead anyone to deduce whether there was genocide in South Sudan, it is important to come back to the issue of intent. Was there intent to create genocide? The report has mentioned two crucial points that could be important when considering whether there was intent or not on the side of perpetrators of the conflict.

One is the repeated reference to the 1991 SPLM conflict. In fact the report was explicit that many high ranking SPLM and government officials have referred to the Bor massacre as an issue in South Sudan. Is it possible that the intent here is revenge?

Secondly the report also mentioned the overwhelming number of Nuer soldiers in the Army which was estimated to be more than 60% and this was largely attributed to Kiir’s policy of integrating the Nuer militia into the SPLM.

Could the intent here be that the power that be in South Sudan realized the threat posed by this huge number of Nuer soldiers and therefore the need to downsize the number to manageable size?

Of course other causes such as control of resources and power can also be advanced but all in all I leave it to the readers to pass their judgment on the final AU report.

President Salva Kiir has decidedly chosen to disregard the IGAD-Plus compromise peace agreement. However, the good thing is that the president’s obstructions are reparable if the structures envisaged by the agreement itself are put in place.

This agreement was made possible through threats of individual sanctions and threats of referral of President Kiir and Riek to International Criminal Court. The game of sanctions right from the beginning was a kind of a joke.

In the middle of last year the Troika applied it to enforce the constantly failing Cessation of Hostilities Agreement of 23rd January 2014. It hardly yielded any fruits. President Kiir and Riek continued to slag themselves while the civilians pay the price.

Instead of going after the real culprits who matter like the members of the Jieng Council of Elders (JCE), the Troika wasted time targeting and sanctioning medium size fish like General Marial Chinoung of the presidential guards and General Peter Gatdet of the armed opposition movement etc.

South Sudanese were not impressed and as expected, the sanctions did not make any impact neither on the behaviour of the belligerents nor on the conflict itself. Frustrated with the ineffectiveness, the Troika imposed the compromise peace agreement.

Riek seized the opportunity and signed it without complaints. President Kiir arrogantly declined to sign it claiming it violated the sovereignty of South Sudan. Within a week of his foolery, President Kiir was dragged screaming and kicking to the table to sign it.

When they were cornered, President Kiir and the JCE made their feelings and intention clear through placing reservations on the agreement. The intent clearly was to destroy the agreement.

In their quest to achieve their aim, President Kiir began violating the agreement by attacking the armed opposition in Malakal and Unity state supported by Uganda air force using helicopter gunships.

Fearing collapse of the agreement, US tabled a sanction motion at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) against General Paul Malong Awan, the chief of the army and General Johnson Olony, the leader of the Agwelek forces.

Juba reacted swiftly and it enlisted support of Khartoum to win support of Russia which it did. It is not clear what Juba promised Russia, but it appears something substantial. When the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) sat, the Troika were caught unaware by Russia.

Russia vetoed the sanctions with endorsement from Venezuela and Angola. President Kiir succeeded to neutralise the threats of sanctions waved at Juba by the Troika by opening up a new relationship with Russia as their protector.

The Russian veto basically became a manna to the regime in Juba. It turned into the Achilles Heels of the whole Obama strategy to achieve peace in South Sudan.

All of a sudden the regime in Juba on realising it is protected; it upped the ante in the game of destroying the agreement. Without delay it threw another spanner into the works.

This time, it went straight to the juggler of the Compromise Peace Agreement (CPA) by ordering creation of new 28 states to replace the current 10 which provides the central tenet of power sharing in the CPA. Without any doubt, this is President Kiir tearing the agreement in pieces.

This contempt for the CPA hopefully teaches IGAD-Plus a lesson. They have been asking for this type of treatment for quite a long time. All along they covered their eyes, plugged their ears and zipped their mouths as in the famous Japanese proverb: see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil in their dogged support of President Kiir.

In spite of the fact that the man committed ethnic cleansing of his “own people” (Nuer), he was received like a gentleman in Washington in 2014.

Here is a nasty dictator abusing and misgoverning his country and yet he was received in the White House like a successful African leader. What did the host think they were doing? Did they not realise that they were boosting President Kiir’s ego and reinforcing his awful behaviour? That treatment psychologically reinforced his abominable behaviour.

It must be noted President Kiir is abusing human rights and governance in the country worse than President Omer Al Bashir of Sudan. Just a reminder to the Troika, President Kiir is a brilliant graduate student of Bashir’s school of abuse and oppression.

President Kiir true to his nature is repaying the Troika with what he knows best – contempt. IGAD-Plus has not done itself any favour in the whole game of dealing with the government of South Sudan. Right from the start, consistently and persistently they colluded with President Kiir against the wishes of South Sudanese people.

South Sudanese must realise that they have no true friend whether regionally or far afield in the international community. They are on their own and they need to begin to chart their own future without the distractions of others.

This is a challenge that they can overcome. As Ben Okri, the British writer of Nigerian origin asserts, “It is our challenge to change the world (South Sudan) by the force and wisdom of our curious situation and angle.”

President Kiir no doubt is determined to derail the compromise peace agreement bit by bit and piece by piece by using all available means to him.

For instance, he with support of President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda use the Ugandan media, especially Chimpreports to peddle lies and confuse the people in the whole of East Africa and beyond by portraying the armed opposition as war mongers and violators of the agreement.

At the same time the Ugandan media promote President Kiir falsely as the legitimate authority. Just visit the Chimpreport website and read the articles they have published on South Sudan and it would be clear that President Museveni and President Kiir are twin brothers in the business of lies in advancement of oppression of South Sudanese.

As I write this piece, there is a serious development which raises serious questions about IGAD-Plus commitment to fair and just implementation of the already faltering agreement.

Given Uganda’s direct involvement in the war, how can it be a monitor of the cease fire? Will it be able to exercise impartiality? Uganda will not and can not be a credible monitor. It fought and fights the various South Sudanese opposition groups in support of the Juba regime.

Uganda’s military hardware like the helicopter gunships and tanks are used negatively in South Sudan to kill innocent civilians. Africa Confidential in its report of 6th March 2015 under the heading ‘South Sudan: A test of everyone’s will’ confirms that “SPLM-IO has failed to overwhelm President Salva’s forces, partly due to support from Uganda.”

Therefore, the supervisors and the monitors of demilitarisation without emphasise should come from neutral countries such as Tanzania, South Africa, Algeria, Ghana, Nigeria etc. Uganda simply will perpetuate insecurity as it is clearly biased in favour of the abusive and murderous regime in Juba.

President Kiir has already expressed that he wants to destroy the agreement. Making Uganda (Juba’s staunchest ally) to monitor the cease fire is asking President Kiir to swiftly run riot with the whole agreement with the Ugandan monitors’ potentially concocting untruth in his favour.

Its open duplicity with Juba against the opposition should come to an end. Unhelpful statements like the one made by the Secretary of the State John Kerry demanding Riek to go to Juba does not make things better.

His demands have actually baffled South Sudanese to the extent that people now think the US is not clued on. US is underestimating the brutality and the determination of President Kiir and the JCE to remove Riek should he come to Juba without adequate security.

If Riek gets harmed that would be it. We can kiss good bye to peace in South Sudan for a long time to come.

If anything Secretary Kerry’s demands helps in doing Kiir’s job of demolishing the CPA. Which brings us to the last ignored but crucial element of IGAD-Plus duplicity. That is, the issue of “moral equivalence”.

The entire mediation was clouded with this concept to portray Riek, the victim in the same vain with President Kiir. This is very unfair and unethical to say the least.

The crimes committed by President Kiir and the JCE from December 2013 to date on the back of the state of Republic of South Sudan can not be equated to the unfortunate crimes that took place in Malakal and Bentiu in April 2014 in terms of motive, intent and organisation.

It must be remembered one is the government with a wide remit to protect all the people of South Sudan and the other is a ram-shackled force acting in self defence after being targeted and aggressed ethnically by the state.

Even the recently released report of African Union Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan acknowledges this fact. When President Kiir ethnically cleansed Juba of Nuer in December 2013, everybody kept quiet. The international media strangely enough covered the subject scantily and then it quickly went silent.

With such grave crime, South Sudanese expected the world to react instantly as with cases of similar nature in other parts of the world given the fact that the foreign embassies in the capital witnessed the mass atrocities.

The United Nations, Troika and IGAD zipped their mouths pushing the Nuer into a corner. Then in April 2014 the White army (a Nuer militia) deeply angered by President Kiir’s aggression against the Nuer and left with no choice, went into rampage in Malakal and Bentiu killing hundreds of people including fighters of Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) of Darfur in the Sudan brought in by President Kiir to support him in the war.

The UN, Troika and IGAD at the time leapt into this developing story loudly blaming the armed opposition without getting their facts right. The Representative of the Secretary General of UN in Juba Mr Toby Lanzer was all over the place leading the blame.

The same Toby who was mute when President Kiir was cleansing his opponents in Juba all of a sudden became lively and found his voice.

As an observer, I do not agree or accept what the White Army did and I unreservedly condemn it. However, what I am trying to highlight here is the unfairness of those pretending to be upholding the high moral ground.

This same Mr Lanzer failed to adequately speak out against Mr Michael Makuei, the minister of Information who in the same week mobilised Jieng militia in Bor. This militia attacked the UN Protection Camp leading into heavy death of innocent civilians in the camp.

Why was it good for President Kiir’s crimes to be muted and those of his opponents loudly broadcasted with embellishment?

The comparison is totally biased in such a way as to minimise what took place in Juba. This behaviour from the international community can be argued as acts imbued with racism because the people killed en masse by President Kiir were black they muzzled the world media and pretended as if grave crimes were not committed in Juba in December 2013.

The implication being the victims and the perpetrators all being black are ‘savages’ with no value. Therefore, there is no need for any action. Black people’s lives are not worth fussing over as their value is naught. In other words the victims were valueless to the world.

Even the international legal system could not be activated. The very United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has the duty and ability to make a referral to International Criminal Court (ICC) but this was not even considered.

Truly, racism is well and alive in the global structures of peace maintenance. Otherwise, how could the handling of South Sudan case be so shambolic without care for the people?

When President Slobodan Milosevic of former Yugoslavia killed less than hundred people in Bosnia, the world instantly reacted and bombs fell on him. When President Kiir kills over twenty thousand people in less than three days nothing happens.

For instance, both Washington and London assert that President Assad of Syria can not be part of a settlement because he kills his people.

According to President Obama, ‘the situation in Syria (is) “an assault on all our humanity.”’ This is a rational position.

What do you call this? Racism! Double standards! Or is it combination of both? You be the judge.

IGAD-Plus because of its composition should be aware of racial issues which on daily basis disadvantages all black people. Sadly this organisation buys in to this unfortunate approach.

Equally unfortunate are the South Sudanese because their supposed leaders in the opposition rather than articulating these serious issues for attainment of justice they engage in discrediting themselves, squabbles and petty fighting.

In April 2014 after the incident of Bor, Malakal and Bentiu, Dr Riek Machar publicly announced that he had set up a committee to investigate the actions of his fighters. After almost a year of raising the hopes of South Sudanese and the international community that at long last here is somebody doing something right, he dashed it by admitting that he had in fact not done anything on the subject.

How can such leadership be taken seriously? How can Riek claim to be e reformer when he is stuck to the culture of lawlessness? Is this not the continuation of the same culture of lawlessness of the SPLM/A brought to South Sudan?

What chance has South Sudan got with these supposed leaders and the SPLM/A?

While these morons of SPLM in their different forms and shapes continue to let the people down, members of the international community sing that they care about the people.

However, although President Kiir has severely undermined the agreement, it can still be stitched back together and put on track. Of importance IGAD-Plus should reflect on its conduct and do the following:

1) Order Uganda out of South Sudan
2) Avoid the temptation of assigning any role to Uganda in the implementation process, which means it should not be part of the monitoring mechanism.
3) Cease its duplicity in support of the regime of terror in Juba.
4) Order President Kiir to immediately rescind his decree number ‘36 Establishment Order’ by making a public announcement over the media.
5) Strongly remind President Kiir of his obligation under the Compromise Peace Agreement so he does not start to play games with the Chairman of the Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission. Any mischief should be tackled head on.
6) Request UNSC to refer President Kiir and the JCE to ICC for the atrocities of December 2013.
7) In line with the Compromise Peace Agreement, President Kiir and Dr Machar having been identified as suspects in the AUCISS Report , must not be allowed to take part in the Transitional Government of National Unity. Their respective parties can choose other persons to represent them. As President Obama of USA and Prime Minister Cameron of UK have categorically said “killers” can not be part of the solution. Therefore, neither of the two qualifies for participation in government of national unity.
8) Ask the newly appointed Chairman of Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission (JMEC) Mr Festus Mogae to exercise his powers to reign in on the abuses of Juba. Mr Mogae should also arbitrate on the issue of the 28 states decreed by President Kiir as his say is final in all areas of disagreements according to the Compromise Peace Agreement.
[Truth hurts but it is also liberating]
Elhag Paul
elhagpaul@aol.com

This article is not for defense of the current president of South Sudan as some readers may quickly assume, but it is rather a political satire.

According to my own understanding and analysis I convinced myself and became confident that any normal human being cannot bother himself by losing his time to talk and write about bad and evil products of Salvator Mayardiit’s thoughts of hatred, fear and envy towards Nuer tribe.

Mr. Salvator Mayadiit mistakenly assumed the power undeservingly by chance at the time that he was something less than a Vice chairman of the SPLA/M. We know he was a vice like Wani Igga, who is nothing in the presidency arena that time, but let us agree that Igga is better than Salvator, because he is Intellectual and his boss is a tribal chief. We all know this unfortunate story of Dr. John Death.

From that time I begin to doubt whether south Sudan as a land worth living by its inhabitants who are created by the architect of the whole universe.

The most unfortunate tragic event which marked the short history of young nation of south Sudan is the coming of the criminal to the power by chance in order to add another burden to the people of South Sudan after the death of the true hero and leader of the new nation of south Sudan.

Salvator Mayardiit, through love of power, fear of his vice and Nuer as tribe in general, conspired against the new nation by bringing his private or tribal army of about 15,000 from Dinka Bahar El Gazal to Juba (Lorri) in order to initially kill Dr. Riek Machar and afterwards destroy the Nuer tribe in Juba and in the rest of the south.

In fact this hellish idea was put into action by Salvator Mayardiit in Juba. Jungle, Malakal in the Upper Nile state and Bentiu in the Unity state. The coward lust for killing Nuers was not certified by his private tribal army, but according to his fear from Nuer, he went on in an effort to free himself from fear as long as possible for his assumed internal political life.

The coward (Salvator) or cowards, the so-called Dinka, went on to bring Ugandans and SPLA. North thinking that he may able to get rid of Nuers. The man do not know or did not hear about the Ugandans stories with the white army of Lou Nuer when the Ugandans were crying and asking their killers: My boss, don’t kill me …Iam not a Dinka

Many entreating words of forgiveness have been said by those who’re set ablaze by Salvator bloody regime during this unbelievable crisis in south Sudan. One victim said in Malakal when caught by his captives: if I were asked to meet as Dinka to fight Nuer, I would not agree at all because we the Dinka officers here in Malakal were 18 officers, after the battle of Gella shiel, Adong, Baliet and Malakal, now we are only 5 officers.

According to me, the victims of both the big tribes many heroes had died in vain in this Salvator Mayadiit war in south Sudan.

For example we usually admire our former brothers, the brave soldiers from Bahar El Gazal in General and Awel in particular who were killed in vain in Malakal and other places in the south because they were mistakenly fighting the war to be their own war as Dinka and not as national forces of the country.

According to me, no one can think even a lunatic or the coward Salvator Mayardiit, about a functioning government in the south without Nuers, Shilluk or Equatorians. This is clear since 15-12-2013 up to now.

On other hand, nothing can be fruitful in the south without Dinka and other tribes when putting into consideration the functioning of a true government.

If thinking of an imported security from abroad or neighbors like what is done by Salvator Mayardiit by bringing Ugandans and SPLA North, this cannot bring security to any coward or cowards in south Sudan, because no government can operate smoothly while the Nuers alone are around the government facilities like the main towns as it is the case now.

If adding the new enemies of the regime plus the wrong and irresponsible behavior of giving poor Dinka of Jungle, Upper Nile and Unity state other’s lands, we can say that Mr. Salvator Mayardiit succeeded in endangering the lives of these minorities with wrong intention of giving their undeserved lands of others.

The only security now on in south Sudan is to be good with your brothers who are southerners like you, because you are sharing everything with him/them. You work with them in work places, and live as neighbors in the same residential places.

This war of lands if the wicked decree is not revised, will last for many years after Salvator’s death even after 200 years between these minorities and the real owners of lands.

For your information, before it could be too late, no IGAD will look into these disputes between our Dinka minorities of Mayardiit and the majorities who may chase them away from these lands.

I am afraid they may even (the Dinka) loose what is known to be their former ancestor’s lands? If it happens later, it will be a dispute between two counties in one state. No Ugandans or IGAD will intervene.

Let this be for your acknowledgement, you the so-called Dinka community; don’t add it to Salvator Mayardiit case which will eventually end in the Criminal Court sooner or later.

To conclude, one can say Salvator Mayardiit is not the only one in the so-called Dinka community to take the responsibility of what has taken place in south Sudan, the Dinka as tribe is the one responsible, because Salvator Mayardiit is only one man among a foolish and greedy majority.

You can also add Dinka council of elders, military and other organized forces generals from Dinka and their followers from other tribes.

Killings, rapes, burning of villages and abductions are continuing in South Sudan where the government and rebels are stockpiling weapons in violation of a peace deal, according to UN experts.

The panel of experts reported to the UN Security Council that both sides were violating the August peace deal while the humanitarian crisis was worsening, with 3.9 million people now threatened with famine.

In an update circulated to the council, the panel said “both the government and the opposition are actively expanding their stockpiles of arms and ammunition”, according to the document obtained by AFP on Wednesday.

They cited “numerous credible reports” that “killings, rapes, displacements, burning of villages, and abductions of women and children” are continuing in Unity state.

Over 50 cases of rape were reported in October.

The experts cited reports that “government forces shot into swamps at fleeing civilians, burned houses, and abducted women and children.”

Widespread cattle raiding continues, while a rebel militia led by warlord Johnson Olony “has engaged in the mass recruitment of child soldiers.”

“The end of the rainy season in the near future may portend a further escalation of violence in both Unity and Upper Nile states,” they warned.

Following a meeting on the crisis in South Sudan, British Ambassador Matthew Rycroft said the Security Council was ready to “take all appropriate measures” against those who are undermining the peace deal.

But a decision on imposing sanctions or an arms embargo will require more discussion at the council, he said, citing a “range of views” over what to do next.

Russia and some African countries have balked at calls for sanctions, arguing that more time is needed for the sides to come on board the peace deal.

“The overwhelming mood today was concern about the deteriorating situation,” said Rycroft, who holds the Security Council presidency this month.

The world’s youngest nation, South Sudan descended into bloodshed in December 2013 when President Salva Kiir accused his former deputy Riek Machar of planning a coup.

The violence has reached appalling levels of brutality, with an African Union report recently documenting torture, cannibalism and other acts of “extreme cruelty” committed by both sides in the war. END

Like Hyenas and vultures rushing, pushing and scuffling for a Caracas, intense growling and gnawing grips the faithful of Kiir in all walks of life and all tribes of South Sudan including the Acholi and Madi of Magwi county. The Lion King has made the Kill and it has brought out the best of the best scavengers. Nowhere else in the nation perhaps these scavengers are hard at work than in Magwi county.

Those who had and are benefiting from the tribal and genocidal government of Kiir, a section of the Acholis and Madi people are scrapping and rustling to get their piece of the meat, with intense consultations among themselves headed by Madi political brokers and other community members to include Acholi, Latuho, Pari, etc this time, involving some less known political power houses, that have been sitting on the fence but very calculative characters the likes of Julius Moilinga, Arkangelo Ittore, Marko Aluma, etc.

Torit has been at the eye of the storm of this political power-broker’s market and it is here that the future of Eastern Equatoria is being gamble with as these opportunists dance at the tribal initiative of Salva Kiir, nodding “Yes sir” to every one of his words irregardless of its unconstitutionalities.

The key brokers are a segment of the Madi community members, known followers of Kiir, led by the shrewd deputy Governor Jerome Surur, Margret Itto and the MPs. Emilio Igga who had been called to Torit to be part of the game, and has just returned to Pageri.

According to a very credible reports coming from Torit, the political brokers are expected to call a massive meeting in Pageri on Saturday, November 6, 2015, to get the masses rubber stamp their initiatives. Some of their agents have already started mobilizing the Citizens to attend the meeting.

Key topics to be discussed in the rally in Pageri are:

*The nomination for the position of the Governor for “Owinykibul State”. The Madi and Acholi political brokers in Juba failed to reach an agreement on the name of the state. Some Madi lobbyists want it named Owninykibul. Morever involved Acholis wants it called Magwi state.

The previous nomination is returned for “wider consultation” by the authority. Juba wants “a rubber stamp” from Madi people about 28 the states. If Juba were to get this, then this will be in keeping with their lullaby that the people want it and have asked for it and have supported it.

This will be their argument as the pressure mounts from the international bodies to scrap the plan for the 28 states. These segments of Acholis and Madis seem bent to give Kiir justifications for his undemocratic act.

It has been leaked from Torit that the two names dispatched by Lobong to Kiir, Dr Margaret Itto and Mr. Jerome Surur which came to Juba from Torit has been returned back, for “endorsement” from the people.

By some report, this was Kiir’s attempt of buying times as Kiir is under significant pressures from his loyalists from both tribes, the Acholi side, JJ Okot who urged for an Acholi Governorship.

From the Madi side, the Brother-in-laws of Lobong, Jerome Surur and his followers never blinked their support for Kiir, therefore would like Surur to be the one rewarded for his loyalties, while his Madi people cursed the Kiir government and revolted against what they perceived as Kiirs oppressive and colonial agendas for the Madiland, to the benefits of the Jieng.

*In the anticipated rally, they also hope to get from the masses nomination or suggested names for MPs for the new state which ever that may be.

*Nomination or suggested names for Ministerial posts e.g. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

* Nimule Town Council- Who to replace David Eriga. The lobbyists in Torit said they need a Madi Citizen in Eriga’s place doing otherwise will cause more unrest in the Madiland and will make the work of the Loyalists difficult with the already strained relationships between the general Madi populations, Torit and Juba.

*They want the Masses to endorse the 28 newly created States and get the official position of Ma’di about it. This is to be done in short notice so as to say, the people have approved Kiir’s decree of the 28 states.

*It is also hoped that the rally goers will petition Kiir and request for new State to be called Owinykibul with its H/Qs in Owinykibul, which will mean a total of 29 states in the Nation.

*The orginizers from Torit are hoping the same day they will achieve filling of Forms by the nominated candidates at the same time collections of signatures of those who are supporting the nomination and Kiir’s 28 states. In short, the masses are the means to the end, Politics at its highest order.

The Nuer Supreme Council (NSC) takes this opportunity to calls on the Greater Nuer Community (aka Naath) around the global for calm and encourages them to embrace peace. While the Council acknowledges the pain the Nuer Community is going through after the release of long-waited AU Report on South Sudan conflict, where the Commission found that there was a State’s sanctioned summarily execution policy against Nuer innocent civilians, the Council feels it’s paramount to remain calm and strategize for ways forward.

On October 26th, 2015, the SPLM/A –IO and SPLM/- Juba, disguised as the Government of South Sudan signed the PCTSA Security Arrangement metric for the resolution of South Sudan conflict in Addis, Ababa, Ethiopia.

Following the signing of the PCTSA Security Arrangement metric on the resolution of South Sudan conflict, the African Union Commission of Enquiry on South Sudan Conflict also made public its Report on Human Rights violations and other Abuses during South Sudan’s Conflict.

The evidence of crimes on the report committed against members of the Nuer ethnic groups are “horrific,” and they include forced cannibalism, castration of boys and left for dead, gang rapes and chopping off of young girls and women breasts after rapes, forced jumping on fire and forced drinking of human blood after being killed by the perpetrators.

These are insurmountable crimes reported and confirmed by the African Union, committed by Salva Kiir and allied militias in Juba, South Sudan on the 16th-19th of December 2013.

The validation of these horrific crimes by the African Union’s report on South Sudan is a victory, but has regenerated anger and uneasy feelings among the Greater Nuer Community. In an essence, these crimes are horrific, unbearable and the NSC understands that Nuer society has a right to be anger.

However, as a community, we need to take back step. Rethink for better strategic moves and answers to the problem. We also need to be thankful to the AU Commission of Enquiry on South Sudan for overwhelmingly and at last validating our long claim crime of genocide committed against Nuer civilians.

This position has consistently been the Greater Nuer Community and the Nuer Supreme Council stance since the day conflict stated and massacre was carried out on the 15th of December 2013 by non-other than Salva Kiir Mayardit, trained militias and organized forces against Nuer.

This position has also been our ground call for justice in order for peace to prevail in South Sudan. More importantly, it has been the basis for armed struggle and to self –defense against aggressors. You may recall, as a community, we had no other reasons than to fight rather than in defense in order to ensure our collective survival.

Various articles on the Commission’s Report justified crimes committed against Nuer innocent civilians. Article 812 for example on the report indicated that the Nuer massacre was a state sanctioned “organized military operation” and in “furtherance of a State policy”.

812. The evidence thus suggests that these crimes were committed pursuant to or in furtherance of a State policy. Indeed, the method under which these crimes were committed proved the “widespread or systematic nature” of the attacks. The evidence also shows that it was an organized military operation that could not have been successful without concerted efforts from various actors in the military and government circles. Therefore the element of the existence of a State policy can be deduced therefrom.
The other evidence which suggests the manner in which ethnic Nuer civilians were targeted and proved as an element of well-planned and well- organized execution of one ethic group is article 459. Article 459 state that;
The fighting in Giada was just to provoke. It was just only to be a signal for these guys to start their work. So immediately when this fighting started in the others, these guys were now deployed and they did the killing, Nuer ethnic group, in Kor William, in Gudele, Mia Saba, ten so it in these areas where those concentrations had been made. Mostly women and children, elderly and youth. So it was a deliberate, it was something planned and this explains why even there was no talk about it. There was not report in the press about this thing. The population in Juba was told never to talk about it. If you were heard talking about this killing in Juba you will just be killed.”

The Commission believe that crimes such as murder, extermination, torture, rape, persecutions on political grounds as well as inhuman and degrading treatment were committed against civilians in various parts of South Sudan. There are also grounds to believe that these crimes were committed in a widespread or systematic manner.

Further, Article 810 on the report revealed how Juba was sectioned into four quadrants to maximize the execution. The report states;
On the part of the State, corroborating evidence from various witnesses 378 recounted how Juba was divided in four operational zones. Roadblocks or checkpoints were established all around Juba and house to house searches were undertaken by security forces. During this operation male Nuers were targeted, identified, killed on the spot or gathered in on place and killed”.
These crimes are insurmountable and indisputably premediated against defenseless civilians Nuer women and children. The report ascertained this fact on the Article 791 which says;
Indiscriminate killings of civilians as a war crime were committed in Juba. Indeed, unlawful killings of civilians or soldiers who were believed to be hors de combat were committed by element of security forces of the Government. These attacks resulted in massive killings in and around Juba. The people killed were either found during the house to house search or captured on roadblocks.

Though the NSC commended the African Union Commission of Enquiry on South Sudan Conflict for making the Human Rights violations and other crimes committed in South Sudan public. The Council is disappointed that the AU Commission of Enquiry on South Sudan conflict did not find reasonable ground for crime of genocide despite the fact that there are overwhelming prodigious evidence of genocide committed against Nuer innocent civilians in Juba.

The Council believes this is a missed step and gross mischarge of justice in its pure form and may have dire consequences. To avoid this path, the Council calls on the African Union Commission of Enquiry on South Sudan conflict to reconsider it finding. For we know, the people of South Sudan and the world know that crimes of genocide were committed in Juba.

This is our position, and we would like to assure our members that the Council will pursue this path given the magnitudes and ghastliness of the crimes committed against our people.

Under these difficult circumstances, the Council would like to reiterate that it stand shoulder to shoulder with the people of South Sudan, particularly the Greater Nuer Community as we collectively inspires to promote peace to ensure political justice and held to account those who have committed heinous crimes citizens of South Sudan.

Though the Council acknowledges and feels the pains that members of the Nuer Community are going through, it is therefore important to recognize that stoppage of bloodshed firsthand by silencing of guns is imperative. It is the first step toward guaranteeing accountable and seeing to an end impunity.

The Council remind its members that continuation of the imposed war is a blockage to accountability. Undoubtedly, this is what the criminals in the government of South Sudan and Salva Kiir Mayardit himself want.

For Salva Kiir, the continuation war is a strategic pretext to avoid justice. On this desperate scheme, Salva Kiir government is preying on renegaded SPLM/A –IO Generals and using them as a springboard to destroy the agreement. The Council believe people of South Sudan are smarter and won’t be dupe by cheap political propaganda for that matter.

Recently Gabriel Changson Lew Chang, the breakaway disgruntled politician from SPLM/A called for mutiny and desertion within the SPLM/A –IO forces. Therefore, our people must know that these are signs of Kiir’s last desperate attempts to kill peace.

In this regard, the Council urges its members and other South Sudanese to disassociate themselves from renegaded generals. Their aim is to destroy peace and deny accountability to take roots.

We must not allow this to happen in our watch because our objective is to bring those who committed heinous crimes against innocent Nuer civilian to account. This is our goal and common national interest and nothing short of this.

Finally, the Council like to take this opportunity also to acknowledge job well done by educated young Nuer men and women and other open-minded South Sudanese during these difficult times.

Fellow citizens, we have done a great serve to your people and nation. You have assured the world that you are a force to be reckoned with; a force for good against the forces of evil.

If the recurrent fuel shortages in Juba and other parts of the Republic of South Sudan has been accepted as ‘The New Normal’ for NilePet, I should think it is high time to tell the government top leadership in the country that this is a very dangerous toleration for the survival of the SPLM-J regime itself. Why?

Because it cripples the core of the engine of urban life: its mobility, its connectivity, its power-lightening, its bread, its water and good mood of the people. Without fuel in Juba, it will be semi-impossible to get firewood or charcoal for bread. It will be very far to fetch water for homes.

That is why the highly urbanized countries like China and Korea will immediately charge up to treason penalty those who attempt to temper with this central strategic commodity. Life will be like that of Hobesian state of nature: ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.’ But it seems some people are very lucky to get away freely after messing up foolishly with this strategic commodity because this is South Sudan, any way.

Let’s not forget lessons of history of humankind. The French People’s Revolution (1789) was known as the ‘Bread Revolution’. Miguel de Cervantes gives bread an emotional weight writing in Don Quixote “With bread, all sorrows are less”.

We also got the gist of the well-known or infamous Marie Antoinette’s famous but apocryphal response—“Let them eat cake”—when she was told that the peasants had no bread to buy in the city because of shortage of the strategic commodity that puts the bread on tables.

Further, the French bloody Revolution was fueled by the bankruptcy of the State as costs of government increased from fighting two major wars: the Seven Years’ War and the American Revolutionary War. The debts led to the long-running financial crisis (debts rising from 8 billion to 12 billion livres) exacerbated by extravagant expenditures on luxuries by King Louis XV. The taxation system was burdensome upon the middle class and the more prosperous peasants, given that the nobles and the well-connected were largely able to exempt themselves from it.

Now, instead of bringing down President Kiir by making him look bad in the eyes of the citizens, the NilePet’s Management should play honestly and respect the mission for which it was established in 2003 under the Civil Authority for New Sudan (CANS) to link oil companies with CANS, the then civil government in the liberated areas of Southern Sudan.

NilePet was incorporated on the 1st day of June 2009 under the New Sudan Companies Act 2003 by the Ministry of Legal Affairs and Constitutional Development so that it could operate as the technical, operational and commercial arm of the Ministry of Petroleum & Mining in order to maximize oil profits for the government rather than individuals. Nilepet is supposed to aim at exploring, developing, producing, adding value and managing oil and gas resources in an efficient and sustainable manner for the sake of common benefit of the people of South Sudan.

The CEO Joseph Cleto Deng who used to be the office manager of President Kiir seems to be operating in defiant to these objectives. His predecessor Engineer Paul Adong tried in the past to deviate from the NilePet expressed objectives but this caused him dearly his lucrative job. I am afraid if this situation of fuel shortages continues repeating itself unabated, Mr. Joseph Cleto may also be shown an exit door soon so that President Kiir could save his face from public outrage.

According to Roger McNamee who coined the term “The New Normal”, it is supposed to be a time of substantial opportunities with willingness to play by the new rules but by doing things right rather than succumbing to the tyranny of urgency for maximum wealth accumulation.

Our President Salva Kiir Mayardit should be whispered to that what NilePet is trying to do is a very dangerous “New Normal”. It betrays the “social contract” and its sole justification of obeying the government so as to avoid falling back into the state of nature after having transcended it into the state of civility.

The state of nature is something we ought to avoid, at any cost except our own self-preservation. Let peace be allowed to come back to the new country on earth. Let’s implement the ARCISS in letter and spirit and we shall never fall back to be disintegrated by the deplorable state of nature.
—————————————————————–

Dr. James Okuk is a lecturer of politics. He is reachable at okukjimy@hotmail.com

The long-awaited AU Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan (AUCOISS) report has finally been published. It took nearly a year for the report to be released following numerous postponements. Without doubt political pressure and being wary not to influence the peace negotiations, played a role in delaying the release of the report.

It’s an opportunity for the AU to lead and contribute to establishing peace and stability in the war torn South Sudan. As many of you know, the AUCOISS is composed of well known respectable African personalities chaired by the former Nigerian president General Olusegun Obasanjo.

It’s worth mentioning that the AUCOISS report was commended by the major world players, the UN and the human rights organisations. The facts about what actually took place from the findings of the independent investigators are now in the public domain.

It’s a massive step in the right direction in the quest for justice for the victims and their families. The report drew conclusions that could be summarised as follows:

*There was no evidence of a coup attempt.

*Widespread and systematic killings took place in Juba in December 2013 and were carried out pursuant to a state policy and were coordinated and also possibly planned.

*Juba was subdivided into operation sectors which are, Amarat neighbourhood commanded by General Salva Mathok, Gudele and Mia Saba neighbourhoods which was commanded by General Bol Akot, Mangaten which was commanded by General Garang Mabir and Khor Woliang ( with two dots atop letter o ) which was commanded by General Marial Chanuang.

*Roadblocks and checkpoints were set up around Juba and were manned by policemen and soldiers. The officers were checking identities and arresting suspected Nuer men.

*Kuol Manyang , the minister of defence was quoted that ” a militia loyal to Kiir killed most of the people here ( in Juba ) from 15 – 18/12/203 “.

*Testimonies from an ex-combatant of the Kiir’s militia states that the fight in Giyada was the signal for the militia to start the rampage.

The release of the report at this point in time appears to conform with a diligent and methodical approach to the problem. In my opinion, it was a difficult undertaking by the AU to investigate the events of December 2013.

The difficulty stemmed from the fact that many of the presumed perpetrators are powerful figures in the government and the SPLA and have exclusive command over large forces . In essence it was a case of investigating atrocities committed by warlords and people know how dangerous this could be.

The next step I would expect would be the announcement of the formation of the Hybrid Court of South Sudan ( HCSS ) as stipulated in the compromise peace agreement. According to the rules of the HCSS,” a person who planned, instigated, ordered, committed, aided and abetted, conspired or participated in joint criminal enterprise in planning, preparation or execution of crime, shall be individually responsible for the crime “.

Also it states that, ” No one shall be exempted from criminal responsibility on account of their official capacity as a government official, an elected official or claiming the defence of superior orders.

Furthermore it states ” The HCSS shall not be impeded or constrained by any statutes of limitations or the granting of pardons, immunities or amnesties “.

The above account means that, the militia, soldiers, commanders and top government officials shall bear responsibility individually in line with their role in the crimes committed.

The report has cleared a big obstacle to serving justice by dismantling the anonymity of the culprits and exposing them to the world. By doing so the presumed perpetrators are now individuals with definite names, positions and could be traced and found.

This has huge implications in terms of starting the process of indictment, prosecution and trial of the perpetrators. Clearly it would have been meaningless to bring up cases against anonymous individuals in a court of law.

Because of the valuable information made available by the report, a family that has lost a member or members in the Amarat neighbourhood now knows the commander of the perpetrators and could file homicide charges against General Salva Mathok in the HCSS.

Similarly those families who have lost their loved ones in Khor Woliang neighbourhood can take General Chanuang to court for similar charges. The same applies to the other operational sectors and the commanders will not escape prosecution and trial.

In a democratic government it would be the duty of the the Attorney General in the would be formed Transitional Government of National Unity ( TGoNU ) to file homicide charges against the perpetrators on behalf of the state and the victim families.

Obviously this is not feasible as some of the perpetrators would be members of the TGoNU and a case of conflict of interest would arise. Therefore it will all be down to the HCSS to ensure that justice is served.

In reality this matter will not end with the trial of the foot soldiers only. It will certainly reach the top man in the hierarchy and the top officials. the statement that the massacre was an execution of a state policy with premeditated coordination and planning should worry those on top of the regime.

Additionally the quotation from the minister of defence and the testimony of the ex-combatant of the militia leaves little cover for the president.

There is still a lot more to come and I believe when the heat of prosecution takes its toll on the perpetrators, we shall witness cracks in the wall of silence built by the regime around the massacre.

Certainly a point will be reached when every man will be for himself for survival. And only then the whole truth will be out.

I doubt that anyone could read the report without feeling the pain and utter disgust of the abhorrent acts that were carried out in Juba in December 2013. It is quite shocking that a citizen could be forced to eat the burned flesh of a relative or another citizen by the security forces that were entrusted with the duty of protecting citizens and maintenance of law and order.

It’s again mind-boggling that someone would come up with the satanic idea of compelling a fellow countryman obviously at gunpoint to drink human blood. These crimes are probably unheard of in the history of the world.

It even dwarfs the type of crimes committed by ISIS and probably ranks with Hitler’s gas chambers in terms of the effect on the psyche.

Since I read the report, I have been trying to understand why the perpetrators acted in such savagery against their fellow citizens.

A lot of questions came into my mind, who are these people ?! Have they had normal upbringing like the majority of us ?! Have they thrown their traditional and cultural values out of the window ?! All these heinous crimes just for the sake of clinging to power ?!

Many South Sudanese, me included, feel deeply ashamed of sharing citizenship with such kind of people. They have brought shame and disdain on the whole country.

The good news is that the report signifies the beginning of the end in two different ways. From the victim families perspective, it’s the beginning of the end of their horrible ordeal as the criminals will soon face justice and receive the punishments they deserve.

This would help them reach conclusion of their bereavement and allow them to move on with their lives. As for the culprits, it’s the beginning of the end of their kingdom of terror and impunity. Also those who thought they would remain above the law are in for the shock of their lives.

NOV/02/2015, SSN; EDITORIAL:
Now that the long-awaited African Union Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan (AUCISS) Report has been made public, the most outstanding revelation now exposed is that Dr. Riek Machar and those now with him in the SPLM-IO had absolutely ZERO intelligence on the cooking Jieng master plan of genocide against the Nuer on December 15, 2013.

How could President Salva Kiir and his closest Jieng advisers as far way back as 2009 conceive, prepare and execute their murderous scheme in full public view, using the national resources that incorporated the national military personnel and facilities without anybody in Dr. Machar’s camp not having the slightest intelligence info?

Seriously, how could Machar as the next powerful person in government and an Army Lt.general, for that matter, not have his own people in the intelligence agencies and even as insiders in president Kiir’s camp since the two top leaders were mortally antagonistic against each other?

Moreover, Machar’s own Nuer tribes-people were so predominant in the army, police and national security services, that surely they could have easily spied on president Kiir’s and Jieng’s nefarious maneuvers at the behest of Machar and their self preservation.

Plainly, reading the Obasanjo-led AUCISS Report, it was shamefully and embarrassingly clear the Dr. Riek Machar, ex-governor Taban Deng, Pagan Amum, Dr. Majak Agot, Oyai Deng Ajak, Alfred Lado Gore, John Luk and the many so-called high-ranking Nuer generals, and also including those of Dr. Lam Akol and opposition politicians, all fatally missed the warning signs of the impending massacre.

On the genesis of the conflict, this is what the AUCISS reported:

49. From its consultations with leaders and other sections of South Sudanese society, the Commission learnt that prior to the outbreak of violence on December 15, 2013, there were indications as early as 2009 that all was not well, and that differences within the party portended violence. The Commission heard that conflicts emerged within the SPLM in 2009 as Southern Sudan prepared to hold elections in 2010. At the time, differences between the President and Pagan Amum, the then Secretary General of the SPLM had threatened to derail progress towards elections. The differences were eventually resolved, with many urging for unity of purpose as the elections and the eventual referendum approached.

50. The other dimension to these developments was the relationship between the President and his Vice President. The Commission established that long before the 2010 elections, the relationship between the two leaders was already strained, and that these differences were overlooked for the sake of unity within the party during the Interim Period (2005-2011). It is was suggested that the SPLM split in 1991, and the reordering of the SPLM leadership to accommodate Riek Machar on his return were partly to blame for the frosty relationship that carried on into government after independence. In 2010, the two leaders are said to have supported rival candidates in a number of key electoral positions, particularly the governorships of several states.

Now, the most serious question supporters of the opposition might query is, how much competent and qualified are those of Machar and his group to aspire for the country’s leadership when the reality now exposed shows their utter incompetence even to safeguard themselves leave alone millions of other South Sudanese citizens?

Once again, the AUCISS revealed that:

Article 52. Perhaps the strongest signal that the situation could deteriorate into violent confrontation was the developments in political circles. The dismissal of the Cabinet in July 2013, heightened tensions and fostered a sense of exclusion in sections of South Sudanese society. The Commission heard from many respondents that following this event, and in the lead up to the SPLM meetings held in December, there were rumours around Juba ‘that the Dinka and Nuer are going to fight’, pointing to deteriorating security situation around the capital.

Clearly, for any normal and even lesser intelligent person than these Ph.D. holders-cum-leaders in Machar’s and Lam Akol’s camps, the impending predicament was inevitable; it was going to be either Kiir or Machar being extinguished, as there was no mutual co-habitation anymore between the these two.

The question is: how much was Machar and his ‘co-conspirators’ prepared for this eventuality since they had publicly vowed their opposition to president Kiir?

Once again, the AUCISS clearly revealed in the following two paragraphs that:

62. With the frosty relationship between the President and Vice President as a background, the Vice President’s declared ambitions to contest for the position of party chairman (and subsequently the Presidency in 2015) coupled with his criticism of the government further politicised the discussions within the party relating to the adoption of the party constitution, manifesto and rules and regulations in preparation for its registration under the new Political Parties Act, 2012. It is in this context of souring relations within the party, that the President is said to have acted, reportedly stripping the Vice President of his executive powers in May 2013.
63. Eventually, President Kiir would dismiss, on 23 July 2013, the Vice-President along with the entire Cabinet (with the exception of 4 ministers) and suspended SPLM Secretary General, Pagan Amum for alleged corruption.

Obviously, as revealed by the AUCISS, Machar and supporters seemingly had ample time to prepare themselves for the D-Day, since now it was publicly as plain as sunlight that Machar and Kiir were on collusion course as unrepentant and deadly rivals. One of them was surely going to be hurt, and very badly!

The AUCISS Report had this to say:

51. Respondents described to the Commission a difficult working relationship, and that throughout the interim period and after independence, there had been no direct communication between the Office of the President and that of the Vice President, with each cultivating other relationships and working directly with other government officials. Based on the remarks of a senior government official who served with both leaders that ‘there was no file moving from (Office of President) OP to VP’s Office and vice versa’, it appears that for sometime, there were two parallel governments, and that the political differences within the SPLM merely accentuated the factionalism revolving around the two leaders. In this regard, one respondent narrated as follows:
I recall it every time especially when we had this transitional period of the CPA of the six years. The evidence made me know that one day something will happen is that there are two governments. You know if you are a civil servant, you know what is going on in the system. The President was there busy with his own goal to reach the referendum and the Vice President was given all the powers but he was setting [working with] his own people who were affiliated to him … in all ministries and we can see the soundness [implications] of what was going on.

Now, from the above developments explicitly exposed by the AUCISS, most of which were no secret to most ordinary South Sudanese citizens in Juba, it was just a matter of time before something catastrophic would occur.

Moreover, the Nuer of Machar and his other allies had people in the top positions of the national security (second in command was and still is a Nuer), the SPLA chief of staff was a Nuer and the national security minister, Oyai Deng was Machar’s co-collaborator.

Isn’t it really mind boggling that Machar and his allies missed the “intelligence” about the impending massacre?

These developments below were very foreboding and should have been of great and serious concern to Riek Machar and his group, plus those Nuer military generals and the politicians.

Once again, the AUCISS revealed the following:

53. Respondents also noted that the recruitment exercise carried out by the army added to the suspicion and tension that was building up in political circles. On this issue, the Commission was unable to establish the exact number of those recruited, as we received conflicting information. Figures ranged from 7,500 to 15,000. The Commission heard further that the recruitment was conducted mainly from Bahr el Ghazal by the then Governor of Northern Bahr el Ghazal Paul Malong as a response to the build up of tensions with Sudan over Heglig. The President confirmed that 7500 were recruited. A majority of the newly trained soldiers were not regularly integrated into the SPLA. According to officials, between 330 and 700 of these soldiers were eventually integrated into the Tiger Unit (Presidential Guard) following a commissioning ceremony attended by President. It was not clear, from the Commission’s consultations, what happened to the rest of the newly trained recruits. However, the Commission heard that some of these were deployed around Juba disguised as ‘street cleaners’ in the weeks leading up to December 15.

Furthermore,

59. Although most senior political leaders are not in the factionalism that marks the political terrain, particularly within the SPLM finds expression in the military and, in the end, sections of the military identify with particular political leaders because of the lack of cohesion within the SPLA, which many respondents described as a ‘collection of ethnic militia.’

187. The third concern that was raised by many respondents is the lack of diversity and reported Nuer dominance of the SPLA. The Commission established that by December 15, 2013, 65-70 per cent of the SPLA was of Nuer ethnic extraction. This imbalance is said to be in part a product of amnesty and integration policy that brought several militia into the SPLA. In this regard, one witness informed the Commission that ‘what brought the ethnic people, Nuer, the majority in the army was because they were a majority in the militia, and they were integrated to the Army’. The concentration of militias within the SPLA, and the dominance of one ethnic community is seen as part of the factors that created the current crisis in the SPLA (its lack of a national character). In this regard, a senior SPLM official stated that:
[b]y December 15th. 70% of the National Army was made up of militias all from Upper Nile and from one ethnic group. Isn’t that a problem and militias? 70% people who were not loyal to the government not loyal to the command and illiterate and people who were at one time fighting the same Army they absorbed in. That is a problem.

Inevitably, it was clear that president Kiir’s recruitment of his own Jieng of Bahr el Ghazal was an expeditiously evil and counteractive attempt to offset the numerical superiority of and dominance of the SPLA by Machar’s Nuer tribesmen.

Once more, the AUCISS has proven that president Kiir’s Jienge soldiers made the preemptive assault and the fatal beginning of sequence of ethnic cleansing:

387. All reports indicate that when fighting broke out within the Presidential Guards in Juba, Dinka members of the Presidential guard and other security forces targeted Nuer soldiers and civilians. Violence spread to various neighbourhoods in Juba i.e Munuki 107, New Site, Eden, Gudele, Khor William, Mangaten, Mia Saba, Jebel and Lologo as Dinka soldiers, members of Presidential guard and other security forces conducted house-to-house searches, killing Nuer soldiers and civilians in and near their homes. It is reported that some were arrested and killed elsewhere. Police stations and security installations were alleged to be sites of killings. Some were allegedly suffocated in containers, survivors were shot. Mass burial sites are said to exist.

Politically, it’s time that Riek Machar and his group expeditiously come to the reality: this monstrosity called the SPLM/A is frozen in time, it has demonstrated the “inability of the party to resolve the political conflict that spiraled into the current crisis which is partly because of lack of internal democracy, and the failure to institutionalize good governance:
the SPLM has been having problems may be since its inception as a result of just one single factor of lack of organization and absence of institutions of internal governance. So always when contradictions got out they easily translate into violence and military confrontation.”

313. Most respondents and commentators agree that the current conflict grew out of the ruling party’s inability to resolve conflicts internally. The Commission found that conflicts surrounding leadership contests seem to be a common feature of the recent history of the party. Examples cited include the 1991 split and the 2004 crisis arising out of the differences between Dr John Garang and his deputy Salva Kiir in 2004.

251 It is the Commission’s view that these party conflicts are due, for the most part, to lack of institutionalization. Indeed, one commentator suggests that the 2013 conflict (relating to the choice of new party officials) was expected, given that in 2008, the party resolved not to elect new officials following disputes over certain candidates. It thus seems evident that ‘the political upheavals within the SPLM follow a cyclical pattern that habitually surfaces before SPLM conventions.’

In the final analysis, the SPLM/A has proven again and again that it’s a failed institution and those of Machar and SPLM-IO collaborators should by now have painfully come to the stark realization that their possible reintegration into the SPLM won’t be a joyous event since they are an unwanted butch of “traitors.”

So long as the Jieng of Kiir enjoy their predatory advantage, this SPLM/A as it is, will never change, it keeps killing its supposedly own citizens without compunction or accountability or justice.

Today, in Machar’s own backyard of Unity State, president Kiir has wickedly ‘hired’ the same Bul Nuer of Machar’s ethnicity to ‘cleanse’ all supporters and other innocents Nuer citizens at Kiir’s Jieng behest. Shamefully, it’s no longer the rival Jieng raping and killing the Nuer but Nuer ethnic cleansing itself.

Finally, if the truth be exposed and said openly, Dr. Machar the leader of the SPLM-IO and many now with him, like Generals Gadet, Tanginye, Gatkouth, Kenyi, or others like Dr. Mulla, Alfred Lado, Taban Gai and many others, had once defected, abandoned or rebelled and fought against this same monstrosity called the SPLM/A under Garang and the same president Kiir.

Separately or en mass, they were simply forgiven and reinstated and many of them sufficiently accommodated as ministers, and thus in collusion with the same president Kiir they looted and messed up the country.

Mr. Luk, for instance, a Nuer, as legal affairs minister abetted in drawing up the current so-called national constitution that basically empowered president Kiir to become a dictatorial president.

Those of Oyai Deng and Dr. Majak de Agoot were in ministerial positions with president Kiir when Mr. Isaiah Abraham was brutally killed by government security agents and till now they said or did nothing.

Dr. Riak Machar himself and others now in SPLM-IO were there with president Kiir when the list of the 75 top looters in government was exposed and still till now Machar and group has said nothing further.

Anyway, whilst those of Machar and co-collaborators who in their previous political lives happily colluded with the same Kiir to mess up the nation, are now preparing to go back to another round of sharing power with Kiir again, however, millions of Nuer tribes-people, the Wonduruba citizens, the Western Equatoria and Western Bahr el Ghazal citizens and others have apparently died in vain and without recompense or recognition.

Will there ever be real justice for those innocent citizens that are being killed and are dying, and will there be real justice against those perpetuating, perpetrating and persecuting the killings of thousands of innocent citizens across the nation? Oh! Cry the Beloved Country!